SynthesisAnnals of hematology2026
The impact of venetoclax treatment duration on efficacy and hematologic toxicity in acute myeloid leukemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Annals of hematology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Personalized Venetoclax Dose Adjustment in Unfit Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients: A Real-Life Case Series Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Venetoclax (VEN) combined with hypomethylating agents (HMA) is a standard treatment for unfit acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients, but the conventional 28-day cycle often leads to prolonged cytopenias and infection risks. Recent studies suggest shorter VEN regimens may improve safety without compromising efficacy, but this remains controversial. To this end, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the impact of VEN duration in patients receiving VEN-HMA. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase up to May 28, 2025. The Cochran Q test and I-squared statistics were used to identify the heterogeneity among the included studies. The network meta-analysis was performed by employing The mtc.model and mtc.run functions of the gemtc R package. We performed all statistical analyses using R 4.0.3. Six studies with 728 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in remission rates between shorter (≤ 14 days) and longer (> 14 days) treatments (RR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.95–1.20). Network meta-analysis of 14-day (VEN14), 21-day (VEN21), and 28-day (VEN28) regimens found no statistically significant differences in remission rates or overall survival (OS), with VEN14 ranking first for both remission efficacy and survival benefit. Although grade 3/4 granulocytopenia was similar across groups, VEN21 correlated with significantly lower febrile neutropenia versus VEN28 (RR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.29–0.98). Shorter VEN courses (14–21 days) appear to maintain comparable efficacy to the standard 28-day course, with VEN21 potentially offering a better safety profile regarding febrile neutropenia, supporting the individualization of treatment duration to improve tolerability in unfit AML patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.